A company wants to use Storage Replica for disaster recovery with a network latency of 4 ms. Which replication type is best for them?

In this scenario, the company is considering the use of Storage Replica for disaster recovery, and the network latency is a critical factor. Synchronous replication is the most suitable option when the replication needs to occur in near real-time and data integrity is paramount. With a latency of 4 ms, synchronous replication can operate effectively because it allows data to be written simultaneously to both the source and the target storage. This minimizes the risk of data loss or corruption during a disaster by ensuring that both copies of the data are always up-to-date and consistent.

Synchronous replication ensures that transactions are not considered complete until they are confirmed by both the sender and receiver, making it the ideal choice for environments where data consistency is crucial, such as in financial services or critical applications. Given the low latency of 4 ms, this option can provide the necessary performance without introducing significant delays in data operations.

Other replication types like asynchronous may result in potential data loss since data is written to the primary site first, and the secondary site is updated afterward. Hybrid replication and incremental replication have their uses in different contexts but do not offer the same level of immediacy and data safety as synchronous replication in this particular scenario.